SoundExchange general counsel Michael Huppe said, "The idea was never presented..." From what I've read, the hearings went on for 18 months. In all that time, the question that "... the per-channel minimum might have a disproportionate impact on certain internet radio stations..." was never recognized? That's just crazy talk. How could that possibly be true? It is so central to the issue.

What were the DiMA group's taxes based on before? Still, a $2500 max sounds pretty good. But because of the inclusion of the above unbelievable SE statement its hard to know if this article is true.

I heard the DiMA group earlier turned down an extension to the very tax environment they have obviously been doing well in, on the 2010 expiration date issue. What was DiMA thinking of? By that time, Internet Radio will be too popular for something like this to pass - if they would just let this grow a little while. If thats true, if DiMA had just let this be, Internet Radio would have won. The victory might not have been evident to all right away, but, it would have been OVER.